ATI Radeon Xpress 200 IGP vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGen. 3 (2005)Rage 9 (2003−2006)
GPU code nameGMA 900RS480
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 March 2005 (20 years ago)8 November 2004 (20 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores4no data
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speed400 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data107 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm110 nm
Texture fill rateno data1.200
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data4

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeno dataSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountno dataSystem Shared
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem Shared
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXno data9.0
OpenGLno data2.0
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 March 2005 8 November 2004
Chip lithography 130 nm 110 nm

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 has an age advantage of 3 months.

ATI Xpress 200 IGP, on the other hand, has a 18.2% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 and Radeon Xpress 200 IGP. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Xpress 200 IGP is a desktop one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900
ATI Radeon Xpress 200 IGP
Radeon Xpress 200 IGP

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.2 19 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 21 votes

Rate Radeon Xpress 200 IGP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 or Radeon Xpress 200 IGP, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.